People v. Melendez, 33 A.D.3d 903

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the defendant‘s contention, the Supreme Court‘s determination designating him a level three sex offender was supported by clear and convincing evidence (see Correction Law § 168-n [3]; People v O‘Neal, 26 AD3d 365 [2006]; People v Glenn, 24 AD3d 427 [2005]; People v Johnson, 23 AD3d 635 [2005]; People v Gambetta, 19 AD3d 571 [2005]).

The defendant failed to present clear and convincing evidence of the existence of special circumstances to warrant a downward departure from his presumptive risk level as determined by the risk assessment instrument (see People v Davis, 26 AD3d 364 [2006]; People v Masters, 19 AD3d 387 [2005]; People v Williams, 19 AD3d 388 [2005]). Miller, J.P., Goldstein, Mastro and Dillon, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: People v. Melendez

Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Date Published: Oct 24, 2006

Citations: 33 A.D.3d 903; 822 N.Y.S.2d 461

Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.